A question from the audience about the promises made by the Government prior to the election:

"Prior the election, the Coalition Government promised no cuts to pension, no cuts to health, no cuts to education, no changes to GST and no cuts to ABC and SBS. How can you defend the budget, which you delivered last week, which basically went against everything you promised to deliver when elected?"

by Patrick Wright5/19/2014 11:44:38 AM

Here's Mr Hockey's response to that question:

"We have to do what is right. Now, what we are doing is increasing education funding substantially over the next three years, which is the four years that we promised to do it in. Right? So it was this year and the next three. We're doing that. We're increasing education funding substantially by nearly 9 per cent per year. We are increasing hospital funding by nearly 9 per cent per year for the next three years."

by Patrick Wright5/19/2014 11:46:01 AM

Question: "Do you think it's inevitable that politicians need to lie to get elected, and do you think that an Opposition that was truly truthful would ever win an election?"

Hockey: No, I don't think you have to lie to get elected.

by Patrick Wright5/19/2014 11:48:09 AM

Mr.Hockey How can you ask us to make heavy lifts, when you and your colleagues and friends are making "nominally" light lifting.?

by Don Voegt5/19/2014 11:50:15 AM

Here's some questions our readers would like to ask the Treasurer.

by Patrick Wright5/19/2014 11:51:04 AM

Does the end to the age of entitlement mean no more $50 000 lunches paid for by the taxpayer???

by Tony5/19/2014 11:51:07 AM

Please tell us about the secret Cambodian deal for Asylum seekers

by Bluebird5/19/2014 11:51:11 AM

Why did you decide to create the $7 medical charge and not just increase the medicare levy

by Lee N5/19/2014 11:51:38 AM

On the Medicare co-payment, Tony Jones asks: "This co-payment you've agreed is effectively a tax on people going to the doctor. Is that a broken promise since you said there would be no taxes without an election?"

Treasurer Hockey: "Well, I don't accept - it's a payment. You can call it a tax ... Given that of the $7, $2 goes to the doctor, I didn't know doctors in that situation are receiving taxes, but your call. You want to call it a tax, you can call it anything you want, you can call it a rabbit."

A comment from a pensioner about the Medicare co-payment: "You've [compared] the $7 co-payment to beer and cigarettes. As an age pensioner, I can't afford beer and cigarettes. I might give away an ice-cream, but that's my pleasure so I just wonder why you mention that. Even a $1 co-payment on Medicare is a slur on the Medicare system as it was originally produced. Medicare has always been a free for all Australians and I think it should continue to be so. I don't think pensioners should have to pay that.

by Patrick Wright5/19/2014 11:57:48 AM

Pensioners have already paid tax all their lives and since medicare came about so they have contributed to it

by Wynn Lawson5/19/2014 11:58:14 AM

Why are the hits to us permanent but your pay freeze is only for one year? Is that heavy lifting?

by Tony5/19/2014 11:58:31 AM

If superannuation will fail to lower the number of people receiving the pension from 80% by 2020, why are you still spending as much on super entitlements as the pension itself?

Question: "Has increased welfare particularly middle-class welfare in the '90s and 2000s destroyed our ... culture and drive? Has it also conditioned Australians to a lifestyle of government dependency rather than self-reliance?"

by Patrick Wright5/19/2014 12:04:03 PM

Here's the Treasurer's response: "We're spending more on welfare than we do on defence of the nation. It is by far our single biggest area of expenditure. Now, it's got to be a safety net, not a cargo net, and the danger is that people fall into a trap of relying on welfare, and we've all got to work together to make the welfare system sustainable ... in some cases we're going to have to increase support to ensure that those most vulnerable actually get the right help and support. So, everything we are doing is about trying to make the system more sustainable into the future."

by Patrick Wright5/19/2014 12:05:09 PM

The middle class wouldn't need welfare if the cost of living wasn't so inflated by the top end of town.

by FamilyGuy5/19/2014 12:05:16 PM

My doctor told me he had received official stats giving the number of visits per year for each person as 6

by margaret5/19/2014 12:05:43 PM

Only those who are in the lower earners of Australia rely on welfare politicians have and receive good incomes paid for by the Tax payer

by Wynn Lawson5/19/2014 12:06:14 PM

The budget was not hidden, the books were not cooked. They were there to see before the election. If the Liberal Party who I DID vote for could not corretly see that they would be required to break so many promises, then they are no different than the labour party of the past.

by caroline cooke5/19/2014 12:06:26 PM

A question from a registered nurse, Kerry Rogers.

"You've managed to achieve something that I didn't think ever was going to be possible. You've managed to galvanise every sector of the health care sector against your co-payment. The AMA, the doctors reform society, the AMF, medical and nursing leaders, health economists - [they] are all opposed to your co-payment.

"How can you justify a $7 co-payment when we're only spending 9 per cent of gross domestic product on our health care system, less than half of the USA?"

by Patrick Wright5/19/2014 12:07:28 PM

The Treasurer's response:

"Do you think the US has a better health system than Australia? They're spending twice the amount than we are spending and they haven't got a better system ... How do we make sure that the health system we have gets better and better over time? That's the question we face, and at the end of the day someone has to pay for it. It's always the taxpayers. Someone has to pay for it. Now, what we have to do is when we have projects like this or initiatives like this, we have to ensure that those most vulnerable and those most exposed have an appropriate safety net, and that is what we've actually done by having the $7 again, $2 going to the doctors, so that they can then determine if someone is in real trouble, and they will obviously not charge. Secondly, it's only 10 visits a year for anyone under the age of 16 or a concession card holder which is millions of Australians, and thirdly, if you have a chronic disease or some serious affliction that is being managed by the doctor, you will not have to pay the co-payment."

by Patrick Wright5/19/2014 12:11:52 PM

I will support cuts in the public sector;

by Pat G5/19/2014 12:12:32 PM

We have a system that is based on PREVENTATIVE medicine. Why? Because it's much cheaper to prevent people from ending up in expensive hospital beds. By saving pennies trying to keep people away from GP's, we'll end up spending pounds when they are hospitalised .....

Question: "I want to know if they were the can Detailed Family Outcomes that I believe have been in the budget since 2005?"

Treasurer: "Well, there have been various tables but we've got nothing to hide. If you have a different set of tables, ma'am, please present them. We would be happy to have a look at them."

by Patrick Wright5/19/2014 12:17:19 PM

A question from Hannah Kilgore, a public servant working for the federal department of industry.

"I have a university degree and I've been a responsible and hard-working taxpayer while I pay back my HECS. Your government has now committed to sacking 16,000 public servants and you've also decided that should I get sacked I will be ineligible to receive any Newstart allowance or any form of Government assistance because I'm under the age of 30. If I do lose my job, which is likely, who will pay my mortgage? How do you expect young people to get a decent start in life with these kinds of policies?"

"Well, there are a number of issues there. In relation to the public service, just before the previous government left, they put in place an efficiency dividend in the public service that was going to cost 14,000 jobs. But they failed to fund that redundancy, that's one of the legacy items they left. And, for example, my own Department of Treasury is going from a peak number of about 1100 and it's going to around 630 under the plans that were left behind by Chris Bowen and Wayne Swan so that was already put in place. In relation to the extra 2,000, 2,500 federal public servants, we've reduced the number of programs and also closed down the number of boards and agencies that we have. When we got in, we didn't - no-one could tell us how many boards or how many agencies the Federal Government had, and we thought it was 700 and it turned out to be a thousand, and we've already abolished 70 which was obviously if you're not doing that and you're closing down programs, then you reduce the size of your workforce."

by Patrick Wright5/19/2014 12:21:15 PM

The Treasurer on the changes to the unemployment benefit (the Newstart allowance):

"A couple of assumptions that are wrong there. Firstly, you don't automatically get the dole at any rate because your redundancy comes into play. So now under existing rules you cannot claim the dole whilst your redundancy from your previous employer comes into play, and that's no different. If you are under the age of 30, you are credited with a year from the six months, you are credited with a year for every year that you've worked. So if you've worked four years, it means you're only one month without Newstart in that period. In that period we're actually going to have work programs in terms of helping you to rebuild your CV, and job placement programs through the job network in that month's time. So there are a range of different programs in place."